Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Iron_Captain wrote: . In Russia, oligarchs are still controlled by the state. In Ukraine, oligarchs are the state
Cap, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but....
It's mostly a choice between pro Putin Oligarchs (Russia) and Anti-Putin Oligarchs (Ukraine).
No. In Russia the real power is with the chekists. Oligarchs in Russia all have to dance to Putin's tune (or else they are imprisoned or exiled). In Ukraine it is the reverse. In Ukraine all of the government is controlled by the oligarchs and Poroshenko is little more than a strawman. Unlike the Russian state, the Ukrainian state is unable to oppose the oligarchs because it depends on funding from them and because the oligarchs have control over the police, the army and other armed groups (who again, are mostly funded by individual oligarchs rather than by the state).
Iron Captain makes a fair point. Putin has the oligarchs at his beck and call, while the Ukrainian government is largely inept and the Oligarchs are the ones that get things done.
That said, one could also make the case that Putin is something of an indirect "supreme oligarch", or from another view, a Fascist (in the classic sense of a strongman leader in charge of a nationalistic and autarkic leaning government operating on cahoots with a cabal of conservative private industry) though I'm sure that term will understandably rile up some.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
Vaktathi wrote: Iron Captain makes a fair point. Putin has the oligarchs at his beck and call, while the Ukrainian government is largely inept and the Oligarchs are the ones that get things done.
That said, one could also make the case that Putin is something of an indirect "supreme oligarch", or from another view, a Fascist (in the classic sense of a strongman leader in charge of a nationalistic and autarkic leaning government operating on cahoots with a cabal of conservative private industry) though I'm sure that term will understandably rile up some.
You could see Putin and his chekist clique as a different kind of oligarch, yes. But the way by which oligarchs rule is very different from the way by which Putin and the chekists rule, so the comparison does not hold up entirely. There is definitely a degree of overlap though.
And if you use fascist in the way you define it, you could even call Putin a fascist. But before you do that you have to understand that "fascist" is a very negative term that rarely is used in the way you just defined it. In Russia especially, it is a very negative term. Calling Putin a fascist would not be useful in the light of the common meaning of fascist.
Iron_Captain wrote: And if you use fascist in the way you define it, you could even call Putin a fascist. But before you do that you have to understand that "fascist" is a very negative term that rarely is used in the way you just defined it. In Russia especially, it is a very negative term. Calling Putin a fascist would not be useful in the light of the common meaning of fascist.
Right, that's why I qualified that statement and detailed my definition, I do understand it's a very loaded term, but not totally inappropriate from a more "dictionary" perspective (as opposed to the more common perjorative meaning primarily relating to German Nazi's and their sympathizers). I'd be equally comfortable applying that definition to many US politicians, including at least one current presidential candidate
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
Russia’s Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of Perm blogger Vladimir Luzgin for reposting a text which states that both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union invaded Poland in 1939. The Supreme Court’s ruling came on September 1, 2016, the 77th anniversary of Hitler’s invasion of Poland, 17 days before the anniversary of the Soviet invasion from the east.
Henry Reznik, the well-known lawyer who was representing Luzgin, commented that the Supreme Court has discredited itself through this ruling and promised to appeal further. He added that an application to the European Court of Human Rights was simply demanded.
As reported here, 37-year-old Vladimir Luzgin was convicted in July this year by the Perm District Court and fined 200 thousand roubles. The charge was under Article 354.1 of Russia’s criminal code (‘rehabilitation of Nazism’) and concerned Luzgin’s repost of a text on his VKontakte social network page entitled ’15 facts about Bandera supporters, or what the Kremlin is silent about’.
It is probably no accident that the ‘offending text’ should be Ukrainian, and fairly nationalist, however it was specifically over the following paragraph in the repost that the criminal proceedings against Luzgin were initiated:
“The communists and Germany jointly invaded Poland, sparking off the Second World War. That is, communism and Nazism closely collaborated, yet for some reason they blame Bandera who was in a German concentration camp for declaring Ukrainian independence”.
Russia’s Supreme Court has now agreed that this paragraph constitutes “the public denial of the Nuremberg Trials and circulation of false information about the activities of the USSR during the years of the Second World War”.
It is hard to know what is most shocking in all of this. A prime contender must be Alexander Vertinsky, dean of the History Faculty of the Perm Humanitarian-Pedagogical University. He proved willing to appear for the prosecution and claim that the paragraph really did contain “statements that do not correspond with the position accepted at international level”.
There are also two Russian courts willing to agree that since the Nuremberg Trials did not mention the Soviet invasion, the information was ‘knowingly false’. With the Soviet Union as one of the victors exerting considerable influence at Nuremberg, it was highly unlikely that Soviet collaboration with the Nazis and its invasion would get a mention.
The rulings are extraordinarily cynical. Whatever was said at Nuremberg, any genuine historian will confirm that the Soviet Union invaded what was then Poland on September 17, 1939.
To deny this is absurd when the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and its secret protocols which carved up Poland between the Soviet Union and Germany have long been in the public domain, and can be read about in any history book.
Perhaps the most chilling aspect of this is that the Perm ‘historian’, the courts, the prosecutor are doubtless well aware of the historical facts. Luzgin has more than likely been prosecuted for revealing inconvenient facts, and the Russian prosecutor, courts, as well as a historian have all proven complicit in this cynical travesty.
The bill outlawing something dubbed ‘rehabilitation of Nazism’ has been in force since May 2014. It claims to be aimed at opposing the glorification of Nazism and distortion of historical memory. The renowned Sova Centre disagrees and believes its aim is to prohibit historical discussion. It’s application in this case has flouted provable historical fact.
In parallel with its military aggression against Ukraine, the Kremlin has been trying to reinstate the Soviet narrative about the Second World War in which details of the first almost 2 years during which the Soviet Union was Hitler’s ally are blurred, and the collaboration justified.
At a press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on May 10, 2015, Putin defended the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, claiming that the Soviet Union was being left to face Hitler’s Germany by itself. Russia’s culture minister Vladimir Medinsky called the pact a "colossal achievement of Stalin’s diplomacy."
Then on September 20, 2015, Russia’s ambassador to Venezuela Vladimir Zayemsky claimed that the Soviet Union did not invade Poland on Sept 17, 1939 and that it was in fact Poland, not the USSR, that collaborated with Nazi Germany. He wrote that “the alleged invasion by Soviet forces of Poland in 1939 is a lie” and went on to claim that although Poland was the first victim of WWII, it tried to be “Hitler’s faithful ally” in the period before the War. “It was Warsaw’s pro-fascist stand which made a treaty of cooperation between the USSR, Czechoslovakia and France impossible”, he alleged. The same offensive attempts to rewrite history were presented by Russia’s ambassador to Poland Sergey Andreyev a few days later, speaking on Polish television.
Andreyev claimed that the Soviet invasion on September 17 had not been an act of aggression, but a defensive act to ensure the security of the USSR.
This is exactly the narrative that the Kremlin has been pushing to try to justify Russia’s invasion and annexation of Crimea.
...something something history something something victors.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Russia’s Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of Perm blogger Vladimir Luzgin for reposting a text which states that both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union invaded Poland in 1939. The Supreme Court’s ruling came on September 1, 2016, the 77th anniversary of Hitler’s invasion of Poland, 17 days before the anniversary of the Soviet invasion from the east.
Henry Reznik, the well-known lawyer who was representing Luzgin, commented that the Supreme Court has discredited itself through this ruling and promised to appeal further. He added that an application to the European Court of Human Rights was simply demanded.
As reported here, 37-year-old Vladimir Luzgin was convicted in July this year by the Perm District Court and fined 200 thousand roubles. The charge was under Article 354.1 of Russia’s criminal code (‘rehabilitation of Nazism’) and concerned Luzgin’s repost of a text on his VKontakte social network page entitled ’15 facts about Bandera supporters, or what the Kremlin is silent about’.
It is probably no accident that the ‘offending text’ should be Ukrainian, and fairly nationalist, however it was specifically over the following paragraph in the repost that the criminal proceedings against Luzgin were initiated:
“The communists and Germany jointly invaded Poland, sparking off the Second World War. That is, communism and Nazism closely collaborated, yet for some reason they blame Bandera who was in a German concentration camp for declaring Ukrainian independence”.
Russia’s Supreme Court has now agreed that this paragraph constitutes “the public denial of the Nuremberg Trials and circulation of false information about the activities of the USSR during the years of the Second World War”.
It is hard to know what is most shocking in all of this. A prime contender must be Alexander Vertinsky, dean of the History Faculty of the Perm Humanitarian-Pedagogical University. He proved willing to appear for the prosecution and claim that the paragraph really did contain “statements that do not correspond with the position accepted at international level”.
There are also two Russian courts willing to agree that since the Nuremberg Trials did not mention the Soviet invasion, the information was ‘knowingly false’. With the Soviet Union as one of the victors exerting considerable influence at Nuremberg, it was highly unlikely that Soviet collaboration with the Nazis and its invasion would get a mention.
The rulings are extraordinarily cynical. Whatever was said at Nuremberg, any genuine historian will confirm that the Soviet Union invaded what was then Poland on September 17, 1939.
To deny this is absurd when the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and its secret protocols which carved up Poland between the Soviet Union and Germany have long been in the public domain, and can be read about in any history book.
Perhaps the most chilling aspect of this is that the Perm ‘historian’, the courts, the prosecutor are doubtless well aware of the historical facts. Luzgin has more than likely been prosecuted for revealing inconvenient facts, and the Russian prosecutor, courts, as well as a historian have all proven complicit in this cynical travesty.
The bill outlawing something dubbed ‘rehabilitation of Nazism’ has been in force since May 2014. It claims to be aimed at opposing the glorification of Nazism and distortion of historical memory. The renowned Sova Centre disagrees and believes its aim is to prohibit historical discussion. It’s application in this case has flouted provable historical fact.
In parallel with its military aggression against Ukraine, the Kremlin has been trying to reinstate the Soviet narrative about the Second World War in which details of the first almost 2 years during which the Soviet Union was Hitler’s ally are blurred, and the collaboration justified.
At a press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on May 10, 2015, Putin defended the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, claiming that the Soviet Union was being left to face Hitler’s Germany by itself. Russia’s culture minister Vladimir Medinsky called the pact a "colossal achievement of Stalin’s diplomacy."
Then on September 20, 2015, Russia’s ambassador to Venezuela Vladimir Zayemsky claimed that the Soviet Union did not invade Poland on Sept 17, 1939 and that it was in fact Poland, not the USSR, that collaborated with Nazi Germany. He wrote that “the alleged invasion by Soviet forces of Poland in 1939 is a lie” and went on to claim that although Poland was the first victim of WWII, it tried to be “Hitler’s faithful ally” in the period before the War. “It was Warsaw’s pro-fascist stand which made a treaty of cooperation between the USSR, Czechoslovakia and France impossible”, he alleged. The same offensive attempts to rewrite history were presented by Russia’s ambassador to Poland Sergey Andreyev a few days later, speaking on Polish television.
Andreyev claimed that the Soviet invasion on September 17 had not been an act of aggression, but a defensive act to ensure the security of the USSR.
This is exactly the narrative that the Kremlin has been pushing to try to justify Russia’s invasion and annexation of Crimea.
...something something history something something victors.
A court in Russia's central Perm region has fined local man Vladimir Luzgin 200,000 rubles ($3,100) on “Nazism rehabilitation” charges for reposting an article on the Vkontakte social network, the Kommersant newspaper reported Friday.
The article titled “15 Facts on Banderovtsy [followers of controversial Ukrainian nationalist rebel-leader Stepan Bandera], Or What the Kremlin Is Silent About,” that Luzgin reposted in 2014, contains deliberately false information about a joint attack on Poland carried out by German and Soviet forces in 1939, according to the court. Since 2014, the article has been viewed by 20 users.
Luzgin was declared guilty in publicly denying facts that were established by the International Military Tribunal during the Nuremberg trials. The court has also described Luzgin, who graduated from school with a ‘B’ grade in history, as educated enough to understand falsity of the information in the article.
The defendant, who first admitted his guilt, later claimed that the article had only referred to communists, and not the Soviet Union itself, and that he had never read the text of the Nuremberg Tribunal verdict.
According to the prosecutors, Luzgin clearly realized that the text might affect a large number of users and form a “negative image of the Soviet Union’s actions during World War II.”
A controversial law criminalizing propaganda or rehabilitation of Nazism was signed by President Vladimir Putin in May 2014 and since then has raised many concerns due to its vagueness.
It is a bad thing. The law was not intended for this kind of thing, but some pro-Soviet judges use it to silence every criticism of communism or the Soviet Union. Also, just to clarify, as it is hard to get from the English-language articles: What the judges are not denying that the USSR invaded Poland, rather, they have difficulty accepting the statement that nazism and communism "honestly cooperated" because this contradicts the text of the Nuremberg trial verdicts. Leaving the truth of the degree to which communism and nazism cooperated aside, having a trial over something that trivial makes those judges a bunch of ridiculous, tax-money wasting nitpickers if you ask me.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/09/04 13:34:09
So... he was fined for what exactly? Posting bs on the internet?
A bastion of freedom Russia is.
I mean holy hell, a whole 20 people read this. You know what that tells me? That the state is so into crushing peoples freedom of speech, that they're dredging even the most pathetic corners of the internet to find a way to oppress their people.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/04 13:47:45
Iron_Captain wrote: What the judges are not denying that the USSR invaded Poland, rather, they have difficulty accepting the statement that nazism and communism "honestly cooperated" because this contradicts the text of the Nuremberg trial verdicts. Leaving the truth of the degree to which communism and nazism cooperated aside, having a trial over something that trivial makes those judges a bunch of ridiculous, tax-money wasting nitpickers if you ask me.
Their honors might try reading the terms of the Ribbentrop pact. it was Russia, after all, that made it common knowledge about how closely they 'collaborated'. And aren't facts in Russian courts usually settled by 'confession' ?
"There wasn't a sickle, but there was certainly a hammer."
BTW: I love the other article in Moscow Times: seems playing Pokemon Go in church is an act of religious extremism. PLOsaur? Hezbollahizard? ISIS-CHU, I choose you!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/04 14:24:07
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
djones520 wrote: So... he was fined for what exactly? Posting bs on the internet?
A bastion of freedom Russia is.
I mean holy hell, a whole 20 people read this. You know what that tells me? That the state is so into crushing peoples freedom of speech, that they're dredging even the most pathetic corners of the internet to find a way to oppress their people.
It is more likely one of the 20 people who read it became really offended and reported it. The Russian intelligence services are good, but they are not so good they can monitor every single thing posted on the internet or on social networks. Hand while technically he was fined for 'rehabilitating nazism', the real reason was of course that the bs he posted offended the wrong people. This is not about crushing freedom of speech, which is not a real issue in Russia (really, despite the fact that there definitely are issues and despite ignorant westerners claiming Russia is some kind of dystopian dictatorship, we mostly have a pretty high degree of freedom of speech). If it were about crushing freedom of speech, they would have gone after something people actually read or take seriously, like any of the numerous opposition newspapers, websites or blogs. The issue here is rather the selective application of law in Russia and the ridiculous power of judges as a result of ambiguous laws. Mostly as a relic of Soviet times, Russian laws usually aren't written very clearly (not to mention the fact that different laws sometimes directly contradict each other). This pretty much allows judges to send to jail or fine anyone they happen to dislike even if the person is hardly guilty of breaking any law (like in this case). They can always twist the law enough to make you guilty if they want to. The Russian legal system needs a few overhauls, that is the real issue here, not freedom of speech.
djones520 wrote: So... he was fined for what exactly? Posting bs on the internet?
A bastion of freedom Russia is.
I mean holy hell, a whole 20 people read this. You know what that tells me? That the state is so into crushing peoples freedom of speech, that they're dredging even the most pathetic corners of the internet to find a way to oppress their people.
It is more likely one of the 20 people who read it became really offended and reported it. The Russian intelligence services are good, but they are not so good they can monitor every single thing posted on the internet or on social networks. Hand while technically he was fined for 'rehabilitating nazism', the real reason was of course that the bs he posted offended the wrong people. This is not about crushing freedom of speech, which is not a real issue in Russia (really, despite the fact that there definitely are issues and despite ignorant westerners claiming Russia is some kind of dystopian dictatorship, we mostly have a pretty high degree of freedom of speech). If it were about crushing freedom of speech, they would have gone after something people actually read or take seriously, like any of the numerous opposition newspapers, websites or blogs. The issue here is rather the selective application of law in Russia and the ridiculous power of judges as a result of ambiguous laws. Mostly as a relic of Soviet times, Russian laws usually aren't written very clearly (not to mention the fact that different laws sometimes directly contradict each other). This pretty much allows judges to send to jail or fine anyone they happen to dislike even if the person is hardly guilty of breaking any law (like in this case). They can always twist the law enough to make you guilty if they want to. The Russian legal system needs a few overhauls, that is the real issue here, not freedom of speech.
If the legal system can be used to imprison people because people don't like what they say, that would appear to be an issue with freedom of speech. Even if it's not Kremlin directed, that doesn't mean it isn't a freedom of speech issue.
That said, that the majority major television and news outlets are state owned in whole or in part (particularly the big 3 national channels), is a pretty huge issue. Also concerning is that journalists, particularly from the opposition, end up being murdered a couple times a year (Russia has had several dozen journalists murdered since 2000 with most cases unsolved, while the US has had 6, 2 during the 9/11 and subsequent Anthrax attacks and 2 by a former colleague on-air last year, the other two killed by locals who were subsequently arrested and convicted).
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
djones520 wrote: So... he was fined for what exactly? Posting bs on the internet?
A bastion of freedom Russia is.
I mean holy hell, a whole 20 people read this. You know what that tells me? That the state is so into crushing peoples freedom of speech, that they're dredging even the most pathetic corners of the internet to find a way to oppress their people.
It is more likely one of the 20 people who read it became really offended and reported it. The Russian intelligence services are good, but they are not so good they can monitor every single thing posted on the internet or on social networks. Hand while technically he was fined for 'rehabilitating nazism', the real reason was of course that the bs he posted offended the wrong people. This is not about crushing freedom of speech, which is not a real issue in Russia (really, despite the fact that there definitely are issues and despite ignorant westerners claiming Russia is some kind of dystopian dictatorship, we mostly have a pretty high degree of freedom of speech). If it were about crushing freedom of speech, they would have gone after something people actually read or take seriously, like any of the numerous opposition newspapers, websites or blogs. The issue here is rather the selective application of law in Russia and the ridiculous power of judges as a result of ambiguous laws. Mostly as a relic of Soviet times, Russian laws usually aren't written very clearly (not to mention the fact that different laws sometimes directly contradict each other). This pretty much allows judges to send to jail or fine anyone they happen to dislike even if the person is hardly guilty of breaking any law (like in this case). They can always twist the law enough to make you guilty if they want to. The Russian legal system needs a few overhauls, that is the real issue here, not freedom of speech.
If the legal system can be used to imprison people because people don't like what they say, that would appear to be an issue with freedom of speech. Even if it's not Kremlin directed, that doesn't mean it isn't a freedom of speech issue.
That said, that the majority major television and news outlets are state owned in whole or in part (particularly the big 3 national channels), is a pretty huge issue. Also concerning is that journalists, particularly from the opposition, end up being murdered a couple times a year (Russia has had several dozen journalists murdered since 2000 with most cases unsolved, while the US has had 6, 2 during the 9/11 and subsequent Anthrax attacks and 2 by a former colleague on-air last year, the other two killed by locals who were subsequently arrested and convicted).
135 dead journalists since 2000, from what I just added up. The VAST majority during Putin's years as President. The number killed dropped drastically as soon as he left office.
djones520 wrote: So... he was fined for what exactly? Posting bs on the internet?
A bastion of freedom Russia is.
I mean holy hell, a whole 20 people read this. You know what that tells me? That the state is so into crushing peoples freedom of speech, that they're dredging even the most pathetic corners of the internet to find a way to oppress their people.
It is more likely one of the 20 people who read it became really offended and reported it. The Russian intelligence services are good, but they are not so good they can monitor every single thing posted on the internet or on social networks. Hand while technically he was fined for 'rehabilitating nazism', the real reason was of course that the bs he posted offended the wrong people. This is not about crushing freedom of speech, which is not a real issue in Russia (really, despite the fact that there definitely are issues and despite ignorant westerners claiming Russia is some kind of dystopian dictatorship, we mostly have a pretty high degree of freedom of speech). If it were about crushing freedom of speech, they would have gone after something people actually read or take seriously, like any of the numerous opposition newspapers, websites or blogs. The issue here is rather the selective application of law in Russia and the ridiculous power of judges as a result of ambiguous laws. Mostly as a relic of Soviet times, Russian laws usually aren't written very clearly (not to mention the fact that different laws sometimes directly contradict each other). This pretty much allows judges to send to jail or fine anyone they happen to dislike even if the person is hardly guilty of breaking any law (like in this case). They can always twist the law enough to make you guilty if they want to. The Russian legal system needs a few overhauls, that is the real issue here, not freedom of speech.
If the legal system can be used to imprison people because people don't like what they say, that would appear to be an issue with freedom of speech. Even if it's not Kremlin directed, that doesn't mean it isn't a freedom of speech issue.
That said, that the majority major television and news outlets are state owned in whole or in part (particularly the big 3 national channels), is a pretty huge issue. Also concerning is that journalists, particularly from the opposition, end up being murdered a couple times a year (Russia has had several dozen journalists murdered since 2000 with most cases unsolved, while the US has had 6, 2 during the 9/11 and subsequent Anthrax attacks and 2 by a former colleague on-air last year, the other two killed by locals who were subsequently arrested and convicted).
That is only the Federal channels. Also, most of them are only indirectly owned by the government. Plenty of critical stuff still makes it past the Kremlin censor that way. And that is before taking into account the myriads of available alternative news sources.
Also, there is tens of thousands of journalists in Russia. Some get killed yes, but focusing on that ignores the fact that over 99,99% of journalists are still alive and continue their work in freedom. The probability of journalists to be killed is not higher in Russia than it is in most countries in the world. The focus on this is part of the Western anti-Russia propaganda campaign rather than an actual existing problem in Russia.
Russia definitely has issues with freedom of speech. But journalists being killed is not one of those issues. The main issue is the increasing government censorship of criticism aimed at historical and cultural sensitivities (Soviet crimes, LGBT rights etc.). While this does not affect the vast majority of Russians, small vulnerable minorities are more and more robbed of their voice by it. Freedom of speech is still relatively good right now in Russia. But this creeping censorship does have me worry about whether it will stay that way in the future.
That is only the Federal channels. Also, most of them are only indirectly owned by the government. Plenty of critical stuff still makes it past the Kremlin censor that way. And that is before taking into account the myriads of available alternative news sources.
Right, but viewership in Russia is heavily vested in those state owned TV channels, with alternative news sources having a less widespread viewership. That said I was surpised at just how regional Russian TV is (Japan too), across the US almost everything is a national channel packaged by a cable provider.
Also, there is tens of thousands of journalists in Russia. Some get killed yes, but focusing on that ignores the fact that over 99,99% of journalists are still alive and continue their work in freedom. The probability of journalists to be killed is not higher in Russia than it is in most countries in the world. The focus on this is part of the Western anti-Russia propaganda campaign rather than an actual existing problem in Russia.
Hrm, I would argue this. Sure, if you compare Russia's probability of journalists being killed to a global average, you might have a point, but relative to the nations Russia endeavors to see herself as equals to, the number of murdered journalists, particularly with unsolved cases, is astronomical. As noted, the US only had 6 (none unsolved and two in a major terrorist event) over the same time period that Russia has seen several dozen, and the US itself has an extremely high violence rate amongst developed nations, with two of those murders occurring on live TV last year. Just because 99.99% of journalists didn't get murdered isn't the point, a single example is often just functional as total liquidation, even in the worst places most still end up just fine (either because they tow the line, go underground, something changes, etc), but the fact that it's a continuous thing and mostly concentrated amongst opposition media, is the issue.
But this creeping censorship does have me worry about whether it will stay that way in the future.
It seems to be a trend in more than just Russia too sadly, the US has it's issues as well (both by the government and from other sources, as much as we like to crow otherwise), and both pale in comparison to a place like China.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
Iron_Captain wrote: God, you guys are just so frustrating. Are you really comparing Russia to scientology or suggesting all Russians are brainwashed?
No, just comparing people who post ludicrous bs from RT to people who believe in Xenu. This doesn't include all Russians, that's something you've made up to try and dismiss the comparison. It merely describes some Russians and some non-Russians as having bought in to a social group, and decided to believe whatever that social group claims no matter how ridiculous the claims might get.
Maybe learn a thing about Russia or Russian culture first before making a comment on it?
Who is talking about Russian culture?
It's kind of funny that after taking offense at a perceived generalistion of Russia, you then go on to make an actual generalisation of Western culture. Stop this. Cultures aren't monolithic, and broad generalisations of them are almost completely useless and generally very stupid.
Stop talking about Russia vs the West. Start talking about people. Start doing this and you will very quickly have a startling revelation that dicking about starting low intensity wars in other countries really just ends up getting people killed, and that's a very bad thing.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Iron_Captain wrote: If it were about crushing freedom of speech, they would have gone after something people actually read or take seriously, like any of the numerous opposition newspapers, websites or blogs.
You mean the opposition papers that have been shuttered, the bloggers that have been arrested, and the websites now seized? Those guys?
Remember that you now have to get a broadcaster's license if too many people read your blog, which will get censored, and you perhaps arrested if it's 'too' anti-Putin. You can commit a world of international crimes via your blog, so long as it only hurts western companies. But point out a historical fact that makes Russia look bad, and god help you.
Why do you think so many of those sites and blogs are now actually based outside Russia?
BTW: Russia just proclaimed the last remaining independent polling agency in Russia to be, get this, a Foreign Agent. This is even more hilarious than usual, as Levada Centre has refused all foreign funds, period, since 2013.
On July 21st 2014 the Russian Defence Ministry produced the following graphic, claiming the following: “Besides it, Russian system of air control detected the Ukrainian Air Force aircraft, purposed Su-25, moving upwards toward to the Malaysian Boeing-777. The distance between aircrafts was 3-5 kilometers.”
They would also go on to claim that shortly after MH17 began to break up an object appeared on radar that they identified as an aircraft close to MH17.
In today’s press conference the story had changed completely. No longer was the Russian Defence Ministry talking about SU-25s, but now there was in fact no other aircraft, or any other object close to MH17. Now we have the Russian Defence Ministry themselves confirming Bellingcat’s earlier work that demonstrated they had produced false evidence at their July 21st 2014 MH17 press conference.
In addition to this, during today’s press conference the radar data showed the flight path of MH17 in the time before it was shot down:
This flight path clearly contradicts the Russian Defence Ministry’s July 21st 2014 claims, debunked by Bellingcat and others, that MH17 had made a significant course change shortly before being shot down:
It’s now clear that on July 21st 2014, only a few days after 298 were killed in Ukraine, the Russian Defence Ministry presented to the world a series of clearly fabricated evidence and claims, and even the Russian Defence Ministry’s own evidence proves that is the case.
The fact that Russia was so active in producing so many conflicting reports about MH-17 directly after they shot it down, just demonstrates how guilty they are.
If they weren’t guilty, they’d be quietly confident the truth would soon eliminate them. But, they are, and it hasn’t.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/27 07:59:49
KTG17 wrote: I can't help but wonder if the Russians actually believe the crap that comes out of their mouths, or they are just keeping up appearances while laughing in private. Either way, the world doesn't believe them, nor shouldn't.
I read a really interesting comment about Scientology one time. A former Scientologist explained that you buy in, piece by piece, to the whole system. Your social and economic well-being becomes dependant on the group, so you will accept anything they tell you. So when they clear you to find out about the really stupid Xenu stuff you just accept it. You don't believe it, but you accept it.
The distinction there explains what happens, I think.
Sure, but that also applies to all societies. Just think how many people are doing terrible things every day just because it is their job (microbeads in the new GW paint for example).
I went to a Scientology recruitment church(?) out of curiosity once, it was an informative experience.
On July 21st 2014 the Russian Defence Ministry produced the following graphic, claiming the following: “Besides it, Russian system of air control detected the Ukrainian Air Force aircraft, purposed Su-25, moving upwards toward to the Malaysian Boeing-777. The distance between aircrafts was 3-5 kilometers.”
They would also go on to claim that shortly after MH17 began to break up an object appeared on radar that they identified as an aircraft close to MH17.
In today’s press conference the story had changed completely. No longer was the Russian Defence Ministry talking about SU-25s, but now there was in fact no other aircraft, or any other object close to MH17. Now we have the Russian Defence Ministry themselves confirming Bellingcat’s earlier work that demonstrated they had produced false evidence at their July 21st 2014 MH17 press conference.
In addition to this, during today’s press conference the radar data showed the flight path of MH17 in the time before it was shot down:
This flight path clearly contradicts the Russian Defence Ministry’s July 21st 2014 claims, debunked by Bellingcat and others, that MH17 had made a significant course change shortly before being shot down:
It’s now clear that on July 21st 2014, only a few days after 298 were killed in Ukraine, the Russian Defence Ministry presented to the world a series of clearly fabricated evidence and claims, and even the Russian Defence Ministry’s own evidence proves that is the case.
The fact that Russia was so active in producing so many conflicting reports about MH-17 directly after they shot it down, just demonstrates how guilty they are.
If they weren’t guilty, they’d be quietly confident the truth would soon eliminate them. But, they are, and it hasn’t.
Hrmmm... first what could amount to a confession that was quickly withdrawn once it became clear that what went down wasn't a military cargo plane, then there was the claim that a 777 was shot down by an aircraft that had an operational ceiling well below the altitude it was flying at with a missile that was little more damaging than a birdstrike against a jet of that size, followed by a whole host of hilariously incompetently fabricated evidence, along with Russia's steadfast vetoing of UN resolutions for international tribunals for the incident...
It's certainly been interesting to see how much of the Russian backed leadership has been offed or disappeared in Dontesk and Luhansk, seemingly as a result of actions on both sides. I dont think anything of value was lost in this case.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/17 22:56:30
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
Vaktathi wrote:It's certainly been interesting to see how much of the Russian backed leadership has been offed or disappeared in Dontesk and Luhansk. I dont think anything of value was lost in this case.
Shut up.
That man had more valour and honour than either of you, and much more than any of his opponents on the Ukrainian side. It is telling about theм that they have resorted to such low methods.
Arsen Pavlov, on the other hand, was a true war hero.
Vaktathi wrote:It's certainly been interesting to see how much of the Russian backed leadership has been offed or disappeared in Dontesk and Luhansk. I dont think anything of value was lost in this case.
Shut up.
That man had more valour and honour than either of you, and much more than any of his opponents on the Ukrainian side. It is telling about theм that they have resorted to such low methods.
Arsen Pavlov, on the other hand, was a true war hero.
When someone brags about shooting prisoners of war, all respect is forfeit, as does any regard as a "hero". Goes for either side (or the US, I feel much the same way about Chris Kyle for example). I stand behind my statements here, and you can be as mad about that as you want. As for my "valor and honor", well, I'm not the one bragging about shooting unarmed people or fighting in a foreign nation under false colors
So, no, not sorry at all.
Likewise, we've got no idea who actually carried this out aside from some highly suspect YouTube video from an unknown source. As I noted above, a not insignificant number of Russian backed leaders have been killed, arrest or disappeared (such as Vyacheslav Ponomarev) at the hands of those other than the Ukrainians. It's most probable it was a Ukrainian element of some sort, I won't dispute that, but it's not outside the realm of realistic possibility that it was an internal factional issue either or something altogether different.
And, lets be honest, this is hardly "low method" in this conflict for either side.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/17 23:48:31
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
Shut up.
That man had more valour and honour than either of you, and much more than any of his opponents on the Ukrainian side. It is telling about theм that they have resorted to such low methods.
Arsen Pavlov, on the other hand, was a true war hero.
It was more likely done by one of his victims friends or family. A common problem of a rebellion is that people have families and friends on both sides of the line, something that would have occurred to the original Ukrainian rebel officers who were mysteriously replaced by Russians.
Oh, and, yeah, shooting POWs in all violation of the laws of war, it bad. Bragging about it? Yeah, valor and honor are pretty much out the window at that point. Remember that Kurt 'Panzer' Meyer was sentenced to death on the rumor that some of his men might have done something like that in defiance of orders.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
He never shot POWs. That is a lie fabricated in a propaganda article by the Kiev Post. The notion that Pavlov would have ever given an interview to the Kiev Post is quite simply laughable.
Pavlov has not always treated POWs well, that much is true. But he did not shoot them. The Ukrainians meanwhile, kidnap innocent civilians from Donbass in order to trade them for captured soldiers. Now that is a war crime..
